It's not Corbyn but Starmer’s Cynical Use of Jews to Attack the Left that is Anti-Semitic

The Labour Left Will Never Recover Until It Understands That ‘Anti-Semitism’ Was a Lie Designed by Racists to Defeat Anti-Racists

Keir Starmer’s ‘patriotism’ is the last refuge of a scoundrel – Corbyn must declare his candidacy now

Kendall Savages Jeremy Corbyn

Last Tuesday in that good socialist newspaper The Times Keir Starmer declared war on what’s left of the Labour Left, declaring that Jeremy Corbyn would not stand as a Labour Candidate in Islington North. I think everyone bar Corbyn himself knew that.

Like the charlatan he is Starmer wrapped himself in the flag declaring that ‘my Labour’, because to all intents and purposes, the ruling class, whose puppet he is, owns the party, would follow his dictats.

Not for nothing did Samuel Johnson declare that ‘patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel’. For if there is one thing that Starmer is, without a doubt, it is a political scoundrel.

• Ø Starmer promised to support public ownership and end outsourcing in the NHS and now he supports further privatisation.
• Ø Starmer promised to defend migrant rights and now criticises the Tories for not deporting more people.
• Ø Starmer promised to reverse the Tory cuts in corporation tax and when they did reverse them he opposed them!
• Ø Starmer promised to ‘put human rights at the heart of foreign policy’ and ended up supporting the Spycops Bill which grants immunity to state agents who torture people.
• Ø Starmer promised to ‘Promote peace and human rights’ and ended up as the advocate of NATO and more arms to Ukraine.
• Ø Starmer even broke the promise to provide ‘Effective opposition to the Tories’ as he pledged allegiance to Boris Johnson’s Covid strategy and supported the attack on the right to protest.

But it is on the issue of ‘anti-Semitism’ that Starmer has proven that the one quality he does have, lying, he has in spades. You might think that if Starmer was genuinely concerned about anti-Semitism then the last people he would suspend and expel would be Jewish members.

But you would be wrong. If you are Jewish in the Labour Party then you are 5+ times more likely to be expelled. Take 82 year old Diana Neslen, a former anti-Apartheid activist from South Africa. Labour’s witchhunters accused Diana of antisemitism over a single tweet from 2017, which said that “the existence of the state of Israel is a racist endeavour and I am an antiracist Jew”. It was only when Diana threatened legal action that the investigation was dropped.

Diana Neslen wasn’t the only Jewish anti-Apartheid activist from South Africa who was targeted. Riva Joffe, who died soon afterwards, was expelled outright. Of course this is understandable. Being a ‘Zionist without qualification’ Starmer has a fondness for apartheid.

You might think that even Starmer would think twice about persecuting a Jewish holocaust survivor. Think again. When Stephen Kapos, a child survivor of the Nazi occupation of Budapest, agreed to speak on Holocaust Memorial Day for the Socialist Labour Network he was threatened with expulsion leading him to resign.

It should be blindingly obvious that when Starmer talks about ‘anti-Semitism’ what he really means is anti-Zionism and opposition to the persecution of the Palestinians.  A persecution that involves house demolitions, torture, the burning of Palestinian crops and even the tear gassing of young children. All of this and more Starmer is quite happy to support as part of Britain’s alliance with the United States.

Starmer gives a clue as to his thinking when he describes anti-Semitism as a form of racism that

‘spreads like an infection. … those who call themselves “anti-racist” who are most blind to it.

 

 

If anti-racists are blind to it that might be because what Starmer describes as ‘anti-Semitism’ is opposition to racism. That is why Starmer pinned all this hopes on an adverse verdict by the EHRC. So eager was Starmer for an adverse verdict that he bought off former staff members who brought a libel action against the Labour Party, despite legal advice to the contrary. In the end a shoddy report by a far-right commissioner Alisdair Henderson, found just two instances of ‘anti-Semitism’ and both related to political criticism of false allegations of anti-Semitism.

It is no surprise that Starmer says

‘I knew we were getting it right… when Louise Ellman, a Jewish former Labour MP who under the previous leadership had suffered appalling abuse, came to Labour Party conference in 2021.

I met Ellman on a BBC Big Questions programme. A more unimpressive Dalek it is hard to imagine. She speaks in staccato and repeats like a mantra all the usual Zionist phrases. When the House of Commons debated Israel’s abuse of Palestinian children as young as 12, such as being woken and arrested in the middle of the night, blindfolded, beaten, denied food and access to a lawyer – Ellman got on her hind legs and justified their treatment. She spoke of:

the context in which these situations occur is an organised campaign conducted by the Palestinian authorities of incitement, to try to provoke young Palestinians to carry out acts of violence towards other civilians, some of which result in death, including the death of young children?

Ellman repeated the lie that Palestinian children are ‘incited’ to resist Israel’s occupation.  Nothing about a Military Government that has ruled the Palestinians for over half a century. A situation where their homes are demolished, land stolen, checkpoints and settler attacks.  To Ellman the Palestinians should be grateful for the Occupation!

When I said that Louise Ellman was a supporter of Israeli child abuse I was accused at my disciplinary hearing of having ‘shamed’ her.  My response, that she was shameless.  But it’s no accident that Starmer has wooed this vile woman.

When Starmer says that ‘the Labour Party I lead is patriotic’ what he really means is that it is now a party which is subservient to the rich and powerful. Patriotism is for the poor. The rich owe no allegiance to anything but their own pockets.

Unsurprisingly Starmer declared that Corbyn wouldn’t be standing at the next election as a Labour candidate. No doubt Corbyn feels betrayed by someone who once declared that he was a friend as well as a colleague but if so he brought it on himself.

It is of course true that Starmer’s decision is a “flagrant attack” on democracy and that the attempt to block his candidacy is “a denial of due process” however the precedent was set by Corbyn himself when he and Jennie Formby barred Chris Williamson, his most loyal MP, from standing at the last election in 2019.

The question is whether Corbyn will stand and if so when he will declare his hand. According to the Guardian’s Deputy political editor and former Jewish Chronicle hack, Jessica Elgot this ‘would pose an existential dilemma for Momentum’ and what’s left of the Socialist Campaign Group [SCG]. If so then the sooner that Corbyn makes up his mind the better. There is no point in waiting for the inevitable.

Having led the left to defeat by trying to appease the right Corbyn owes it to his supporters to break free of Starmer’s neo-liberal Tory Party  Mk. II and create a new working class socialist party.

Of course this would pose a dilemma for the SCG but one thing is abundantly clear.  Either the SCG abandons what remains of their politics or Starmer will be rid of them. Indeed breaking from the Labour Party, if Corbyn played his cards right, could result in the downfall of Starmer who remains personally unpopular in the country not least because he oozes insincerity and is seen to stand for nothing.

But it is incumbent on Corbyn to come to terms with what happened during his 4 years leadership. It is time to face up to the fact that what Labour experienced was not anti-Semitism but an orchestrated campaign by the right, led by the Daily Mail and the Jewish Chronicle, to paint opposition to the Israeli state as ‘anti-Semitism’.

The problem with Corbyn, as his confrontation with Liz Kendall demonstrated, is that he is still wedded to the idea that the Labour Party had a problem with anti-Semitism when it didn’t. The very fact that Starmer has been expelling so many Jewish people testifies to that fact. When asked if he would apologise by Peston the obvious answer was ‘apologise for what?’.

It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to work out that if anti-Semitism had been a problem in the Labour Party then it is hardly likely that the Mail, Sun and Express, to say nothing of the Guardian, would have been so concerned about it. Corbyn could have made all these points and more but instead he tried to explain the difference between exaggerating the numbers of those expelled for anti-Semitism and exaggerating anti-Semitism.  A wholly futile exercise.

Similarly Justin Schlosberg’s points about Labour under Formby being better at expelling people for ‘anti-Semitism’ than Iain McNicol conceded the fact that ‘anti-Semitism’ was a problem when it wasn’t. It is irrelevant whether or not Corbyn interfered with the disciplinary process. If he didn’t he should have!

Corbyn above all should have known that when people support the Palestinians they are, as a matter of course, accused of anti-Semitism. He has been around the Palestine solidarity movement for 40 years yet instead of rebutting the accusation he took it personally. He never took the time to understand Zionism.

Instead from the very start Corbyn began appeasing the Right and the Jewish Labour Movement in particular. Yet they were unappeasable.  The only thing they were interested in was being rid of him.

So we had the absurdity on pages 306, 333, 346 of the Leaked Report  which stated that:

Jeremy Corbyn himself and members of his staff team requested to GLU that particular antisemitism cases be dealt with. In 2017 LOTO staff chased for action on high-profile antisemitism cases Ken Livingstone, Tony Greenstein, Jackie Walker and Marc Wadsworth, stressing that these cases were of great concern to Jewish stakeholders and that resolving them was essential to “rebuilding trust between the Labour Party and the Jewish community”.

Well we were all expelled or forced out and all that happened was that the Zionists came for more victims like Chris Williamson, Pete Willsman and Christine Shawcroft – all of whom were duly delivered up. And yet, far from saving Corbyn it merely ensured his defeat, not least because he apologised so much that he lost all credibility. You never apologise to your enemies you take the fight to them.

Anyone hoping that the SCG, which has split in two, would rise to the challenge is going to be disappointed. Diane Abbot has declared her support for NATO and Starmer. McDonnell has become a war hawk on Ukraine and there is disarray all round. The cowards are running for cover faster than greased lightening.

If Corbyn is going to salvage anything from the present situation he needs to break from Labour now and take steps to form a new socialist party.  This would allow trade unionist to pressure their unions to do likewise. The Labour Party is dead to the left.

Will Corbyn do it?  I wouldn’t advise you to hold your breath!

Tony Greenstein

Israel’s neo-Nazi Police Minister Itamar Ben Gvir Approves of the Attack on Issa Amro and the Attacks on Palestinian Red Crescent

Starmer & Reeves Also Approve of Israel’s Military Junta in the West Bank – Reeves is ‘Angry’ at Any Criticism of Israeli Apartheid

It is scarcely necessary to comment on these two videos. Unprovoked violence against Issa Amro, a Palestinian activist and pacifist living in Hebron, who has been under constant attack by the Israeli military who a few months ago declared his home a ‘Closed Military Zone’.

As he was giving an interview to Lawrence Wright, an American journalist from the New Yorker, Issam was subject to an unprovoked attack.  Wright however displayed all the bias and prejudice one has come to expect from the capitalist media. His focus was on the ‘dehumanisation’ of Israel’s soldiers not the dehumanisation of the Palestinians and their treatment.

What you might ask is wrong with these presstitutes? Is support and sympathy for Israel hardwired into their brains?

But let us not forget that it is imperialist politicians like Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves who are responsible for Israel being able to get away literally with murder. Indeed the despicable Reeves is ‘angry’ that people should even call Israel out for what it is.

If Issam had attacked and kicked an Israeli soldier he would have been killed. As it is the soldier received 10 days in prison, not for the attack, but because he did it in the full glare of the media. Next time he will know to do it in the dark, out of the way of cameras.

The attacks on Palestinian medical teams in the second video are equally despicable but once again our politicians stay silent. One expects approval of atrocities and war crimes from the Tories but not from the Labour Party. But today Labour is more concerned about ‘anti-Semitism’ i.e. criticism of Israel’s actions than the Military Junta that rules in Palestine and the Apartheid society that they have created.

Israel’s neo-Nazi Police Minister Ben Gvir naturally approves of what happened to Issam.  Both Gvir and Defence/Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich approve of the expulsion of Israel’s Palestinian citizens. Why shouldn’t they? Gvir was a member of Kach, a Jewish Nazi group that called for the expulsion of all Arabs from Israel and which applauded the murder of 29 Palestinians in the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron by one of their members, Baruch Goldstein.

This is Israel’s government today but the protestors in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv are unconcerned about the Junta that rules the West Bank. Their only concern is with ‘Jewish Democracy’ and the threat to Israel’s Supreme Court.

Tony Greenstein

Is Rachel Reeves the Most Despicable Politician in Britain Today?

Reeves Combines Zionism, Racism, Admiration for a Hitler Loving Anti-Semite & Hostility to the Disabled & Claimants - a Bigot for All Seasons

Sturmer pays tribute to Jeremy Corbyn

Trying to find the most despicable politician in Britain today is no easy matter. The competition is strong. The Tories have no end of good candidates – Ugly Patel, Cruella Braverman, Boris and Mogg – but they are Tories. You would expect no better of those who are ‘lower than vermin’ (A Bevan).

The competition is equally strong amongst Labour MPs. Keir Starmer himself is a strong contender, not least because when it comes to honesty and respect for the truth he makes Boris Johnson seem a paragon of virtue. Jess Phillips would also be a strong contender if anyone took her seriously. But the winner by a mile has to be Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves.

Reeves has all the required qualities of bigotry, prejudice, upper class disdain and sheer dishonesty. A former Bank of England economist she is so far to the right that she’s in danger of falling off the planet.

Reeves first came to people’s attention as an unreconstructed stone-age right-winger when, in an interview with the Guardian she declared that

“We are not the party of people on benefits. We don’t want to be seen, and we’re not, the party to represent those who are out of work,” she said. “Labour are a party of working people, formed for and by working people.”

18 months previously, as Ed Miliband’s  shadow work and pensions secretary, she had promised that

‘We would be tougher [than the Conservatives]. If they don't take it [the offer of a job] they will forfeit their benefit.’

In other words starvation would be used to make the jobless take the any job, however low the pay. Thus continuing the Tory policy of using unemployment to lower the price of labour. She also promised that Labour would be tougher than the Tories when it comes to slashing the benefits bill.

Yet if anyone is likely to replace the charisma-free zone that is Keith Starmer then it is Reeves, who doesn’t have a socialist bone in her body. Unlike Starmer she didn’t serve in Corbyn’s shadow cabinet and never felt obliged to say anything in his defence unlike the two-faced Starmer.

A number of leading Zionists like Jewish Chronicle Editor Jake Wallis Simons have criticised Starmer because of this. Starmer’s replacement may prove attractive to the Labour Right. See Can Jews like me trust Keir Starmer’s Labour party?

The hypocrisy and dishonesty surrounding Labour’s fake ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign is nowhere better evidenced in Reeves admiration for the Hitler admiring Lady Nancy Astor, the second woman to be elected to Parliament on 28 November 1919.

The Countess Markievicz

Reeves claim that Astor was the first woman elected to Parliament conveniently omitted the revolutionary socialist Sinn Fein MP the Countess Markievicz who was elected 11 months earlier, though she did not take her seat.

Labour Party members have been expelled for far less than praise for a Hitler devotee, yet Starmer deliberately ignored Reeves gushing praise of Astor. The same was true of the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland who uttered not a word of criticism of Reeves, confining his criticism to Corbyn.

Corbyn was slated by the Board of Deputies for having ignored John Hobson’s anti-Semitism in his introduction to Imperialism yet Hobson’s anti-Semitism pales in comparison to that of Astor.

The Anti-Semitism of Lady Astor that Reeves & Starmer Have Endorsed by Omission

In 1936 Lady Astor and others of her class, wrote to Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin that they “‘wholeheartedly’ endorsed the Führer‘s act” in marching into the Rhineland. The Cliveden set, named after Astor’s country residence, was a term first used by the Reynolds News on 28 November 1937. In 1938 they entertained Nazi apologist Charles Lindbergh. The group were highly sympathetic to fascism. A David Low cartoon published in the Evening Standard, showed Astor and Times Editor Geoffrey Dawson and others, holding high the slogan "Any Sort of Peace at Any Sort of Price".

Astor and fellow parasites

At a Jewish charity dinner in November 1934, she asked James McDonald, the League of Nations’ High Commissioner for Refugees:

did I not after all believe there must be something of the Jews themselves which had brought them persecution throughout all the ages? Was it not therefore, in the final analysis, their responsibility?

Astor accused the Foreign Office of being manipulated by Catholics, who she also hated.

Astor became convinced that she was a victim of “Jewish Communistic propaganda”. In the House of Commons on 28 February 1938, Harold Nicolson heard Alan Graham, Tory Party MP for Wirral, say to Astor: "I do not think you behaved very well." She replied: "Only a Jew like you would dare to be rude to me." The News Chronicle commented that Astor's "emotions about the Jews" had overcome "her sense of fitness". She introduced Chaim Weizmann at a party as "the only decent Jew I have ever met." Which says as much about Weizmann, the President of the World Zionist Organisation and Israel’s first President as it does about Astor.

Claude Cockburn linked the Astors to appeasement on the basis that they were keen to use Hitler as a bulwark against Bolshevism. Astor had connections with influential people such as Philip Kerr who was active as an emissary to Hitler.

Astor complained that the Observer, which belonged to her husband's family, was "full of homosexuals and Jews" and worked to bar Jews and Catholics from the newspaper's senior positions.

Astor wrote letters to US Ambassador Joseph Kennedy in which she suggested the Nazis were a solution to "the world problems" of Jewry and Communism. She told Kennedy Hitler would have to do more than "give a rough time" to "the killers of Christ" for her to want Britain and America to launch

"Armageddon to save them. The wheel of history swings round as the Lord would have it. Who are we to stand in the way of the future?"

She was referred to as "the Honourable Member from Berlin" during a 1939 Commons debate. Her opposition to the war earned her the title of "Hitler's woman in Britain".

It is inconceivable that Reeves was unaware of Nancy Astor’s virulent anti-Semitism yet even when it was pointed out to her, she refused to retract her praise of Astor. Starmer adamantly refused to do anything.

Let it not be said that Reeves only has a blind spot when it comes to anti-Semitism and love of Hitler. Reeves is equally bigoted against the unemployed and disabled saying that Labour does not want to represent people out of work.

Reeves, like many anti-Semites, adores the Israeli state and Zionism. After Kim Johnson had been threatened with the loss of the whip for describing Israel as a fascist and apartheid state, Reeves said that Johnson’s treatment was ‘a sign of just how serious Keir Starmer is at booting both antisemitism and “anti-Zionism” out of Labour.’

In an article ‘I’m proud to be a Labour Friend of Israel’, Reeves said she believed that political criticism of Israel was motivated by antisemitism. A completely evidence-free accusation as she herself proves. She also made it clear that the presence of fascists and neo-Nazis in Israel’s government would ‘not stop a future Labour government forging a strong relationship with the Jewish state’.

Since Reeves equates hostility to Israeli Apartheid with anti-Semitism it is worthwhile seeing if there is any basis to what Kim Johnson said.

 Mass murderer Baruch Goldstein - hero to Israel's Police Minister Itamar Ben Gvir

The Israeli Government’s Fascists & Neo-Nazis

The spiritual guide of Israel’s Police Minister, convicted racist Itamar Ben-Gvir, is Rabbi Dov Lior, the Chief Rabbi of Kiryat Arba. Dov Lior once said that “a thousand non-Jewish lives are not worth a Jew’s fingernail”.

Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, when presiding at Baruch Goldstein’s funeral, a man who on 25 February 1994 entered the Ibrahimi mosque in Hebron opening fire and killing 29 worshippers, told mourners that even 1 million Arabs “are not worth a Jewish fingernail.

Lior described Goldstein as "holier than all the martyrs of the Holocaust." and until recently had a picture of Goldstein on the wall of his front room. But to Starmer and Reeves it is forbidden to mention that Israel is governed by those advocating genocide of the Palestinians. People who hold security posts in Israel’s cabinet.

Dov Lior also endorsed Torat HaMelech, a guide to how to kill non-Jews according to Jewish religious law. It was written in 2009 by two rabbis, Yitzhak Shapira and Yosef Elitzur. The following are extracts from the book:

“If we kill a gentile who has violated one of the seven commandments [the Noahide laws], there is nothing wrong with the murder,”

Shapira wrote that even babies and children of Israel’s enemies may be killed, since “it is clear that they will grow to harm us. Which is almost word for word what Himmler said when justifying killing Jewish children.

‘Anywhere where the presence of a gentile poses a threat to Israel, it is permissible to kill him, even if it is a righteous gentile who is not responsible for the threatening situation.”

Other rabbis who endorsed the book included Rabbi Yaakov Yosef, son of former Sephardic Chief Rabbi Ovadia Yosef.

Gvir belonged to Rabbi Meir Kahane’s Kach. Its spokesman, Noam Federman, described Goldsteins mass murder of Palestinians as “one of greatness. It was a great act of sanctifying the Name (God).”

Zvika Fogel, a member of Gvir’s Religious Zionism, declared that

“if it is one Israeli mother crying, or a thousand Palestinian mothers crying, then a thousand Palestinian mothers will cry.”

Even Israelis have described Israel’s government as having fascist and neo-Nazi members. Daniel Blatman, a holocaust historian at the Hebrew University and Chief Historian at Poland’s Warsaw Ghetto Museum has just written an article for Ha’aretz ‘Israel’s Government Has neo-Nazi Ministers. It Really Does Recall Germany in 1933’. Ideologically Gvir, Smotrich and other members of Netanyahu’s coalition are close to the Nazis, yet Reeves told the Jewish News that she had been 'incredibly angry, frustrated and depressed' by someone telling the truth about Israeli apartheid and fascism.

It would be unfair to Reeves just to target her for her virulent Zionism. She is equally racist when it comes to asylum seekers. As the Tories began demonising refugees crossing the Channel and talking of an ‘invasion’ where was Reeves? Did she protest at the Tories racist rhetoric?  Not a bit of it.  She joined in calling on the Tories to “get a grip” of the immigration system and “ensure that people who have not got a right to be here are sent home.”

And no one is happier about the mass haemorrhaging of Labour Party members. The more members leave the better as far as Reeves is concerned. Because she is, after all, a true democrat Starmer style.